Kal Raustiala 2014-03-07 6:02 PM

对地理标识的全球争议 The Global Struggle Over Geographic Indications


The WTO TRIPs Agreement heralded a landmark and controversial change in international law. It significantly increased the power of international intellectual property law and simultaneously engendered debate over the status and scope of intellectual property rights. Perhaps the most theoretically-contested such right relates to 'geographic indications' (GIs). Akin to a trademark, a GI identifies a good as originating in a particular region, where a given quality of the good is attributable to its place of origin. Because the place is said to be essential to the product, proponents argue that those outside a specified region cannot be permitted to use its place-name on product labels. The question of GI protection is linked to politically sensitive debates over agricultural protection, as well as the degree to which international law ought to trench upon questions of culture and tradition. 
This paper examines and critiques the rise of GIs in international law. Although GIs have a long history, we argue they gained markedly greater salience in the postwar period due to major changes in the global economy. Increasing consolidation of formerly discrete markets in turn meant increased competition - and opportunities - for many traditional producers. This enhanced global competition has raised the value of putative GI rights. While economic concerns loom large, the effort to entrench GI protection also draws strength from more diffuse concerns about authenticity, culture, and locality in a rapidly integrating world. 
After explaining the origins of the effort to protect GIs we assess the justification for these new rights. We argue that GI protection is justifiable for many of the reasons that trademark rights are justifiable: primarily, to protect consumers against confusion and to lower their search costs. We contend, however, that the current level of protection afforded by TRIPs for wine and spirits - which disallows any mention of a protected GI by a producer outside the region, even if the production locale is clearly indicated - is unwarranted in that it goes well beyond what trademark theory supports. A fortiori, further expansion of the wines and spirits standard to new products, as currently sought by European and other states in the Doha Round, is unjustified as well. We defend this position through careful consideration of the major theoretical bases for property rights.





Kal Raustiala

0 Following 1 Fans 0 Projects 8 Articles



Read More

Abstract    One of the signal features of contemporary world politics is that intellectual property rights are increasingly an arena for global coopera

Read More

AbstractThe WTO TRIPs Agreement heralded a landmark and controversial change in international law. It significantly increased the power of internationa

Read More

Abstract   This paper, written for a forthcoming volume on climate change, provides a positive analysis of the roles and impact of non-state actors (NG

Read More

AbstractShould traditional knowledge - the understanding or skill possessed by indigenous peoples pertaining to their culture and folklore and their us

Read More

AbstractThis essay, forthcoming in the Oxford Guide to Treaties, surveys the role of NGOs in treatymaking. It asks four key questions. First, what role

Read More

Abstract  The orthodox justification for intellectual property is utilitarian. Advocates for strong IP rights argue that absent such rights copyists wi

Read More

AbstractJack Goldsmith and Eric Posner's "The Limits of International Law" is not an uplifting read for most international lawyers, who are trained to

Read More